Re: GNU Make Extensions

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, NightStrike wrote:

> If automake has the ability to flatten the += syntax so that
> non-portable make advances can be used, why can't the same logic apply
> to wildcard usage?  The biggest argument against it that I've heard is
> that it is a GNU-only option.  However, I've suggested in the past
> that it'd be great if Automake can just process the wildcard and
> output the Makefile.in accordingly.  It sounds like my suggestion
> wasn't that wild afterall if Automake can do this currently for things
> like +=.

Automake is written in Perl, which is a very powerful scripting 
language.  Of course it could easily be extended to do such a thing.

> When you have a library with 357 source files, the list in Makefile.am
> becomes unwieldy.

I think that the fear is that the package will accidentally end up 
with 356 or 358 source files but that exactly 357 are required. 
There is the idea that software should be constructed by design rather 
than by accident.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/